The Gay Agenda, a supposed plot designed to help in emasculating men, annihilating the black male, as well as being a large part of a government conspiracy to turn the world into homosexuals. A large group of people ranging from extremists', right-wing bigots to radical, left-wing bigots often assert the existence of an agenda pushing us further into becoming lovers of the same sex, but based on my research of their claims, I have found evidence to prove otherwise.
Evidence#1: The Feminization of Men
With today's current trend of men wearing kilts, many have claimed the trend in question is a means to feminize males in America. In particular, some would even suggest it is solely directed towards black youth with the intent to destroy the black male, But if we look through history we will find, men have worn clothing we consider to be skirts in a number of places long before any society had the chance to develop the concept of clothes being gender specific. In fact men were seen wearing skirts as early as 5000 B.C.E. in ancient Egypt as well as being present in the attire of ancient Greek, Roman, and Hebrew men. In Egypt, both men and women wore Tunics, which were sown to fit their bodies. Each tunic appeared to be the length of a long T-shirt, reaching the knees for men. For women, tunics generally reached their ankles. These tunics, were typically white and were made of linen. Due to Egypt's hot climate, the usage of tunics covering the upper body had become unnecessary. Because of this, during the Old kingdom (2700 -2000 B.C.E.) and Middle Kingdom (2000-1500 B.C.E.), men primarily dressed themselves in a Kilt or Schenti, a fabric worn around the waist. In order to make a clear distinction between social classes, Noblemen, were known to some times wear beaded dresses. During the new kingdom, nobles would occasionally wear a long robe over their kilt. In the Middle Kingdom, nobles were often seen wearing a lengthened kilt along with a transparent overskirt with collars.
In ancient Rome, men typically wore two garments, the Tunica, a short woolen undergarment with short sleeves and the Toga, a large robe like garment which used up to 9 yards of material made from white wool. Due to it's bulky nature, it was later decided this form of clothing would only be required for special events.
Given the fact this form of clothing was worn by both men and women during these time periods, the perception of men being feminized by wearing such garments in present day is at best, a flawed concept which has been based entirely on what our current society considers to be feminine.
Many Black Nationalist have gone out their way to bring attention to men in prison in order to prove the existence of the agenda, stating it's initial goal is to get as many black men as they can in jail, deprive them of women and then turn those men gay. The problem with this assertion comes from an incredible amount of misinformation about life in prison as well as how men in there have turned out to be gay. In truth, you're either gay or you're not gay, no one has control over what your sexual preference is. Contrary to what some believe, not all men have sex with fellow inmates. Some of them who are having sex are actually willing participants, with only a handful or more being forced into performing. To an extent, feelings for the same sex had to have been there already. Since most who have been incarcerated identified themselves as heterosexual, technically these men participating in sexual intercourse would be considered bisexual or pansexual not gay.
Evidence#2: LGBT Rights; Homosexual corruption
In the fight for Lgbt rights, a large majority of straight, conservative Christians assert that all homosexuals are plotting to destroy free speech by demanding non-discrimination laws along with attacking churches, ban counseling for kids confused by homosexual issues, insisting for them to adopt children, promoting gay pride parades, pushing their agenda in public schools, as well as demanding public funding to deal with increased homosexual-related social problems. Right wingers have even gone so far to claim they desire special treatment that no other group of people have. At first glance, it would almost appear as if they might have a legitimate reason to make such accusations, but a closer look at their argument exposes multiple flaws in their "logic". For example:
1. Demanding laws against discrimination will not have any effect on ones right to free speech, it only serves as a means to crack down on anyone polluting society with their intolerant hate speech.
2. Constructively criticizing churches for their actions in promoting discrimination and disdain of the LGBT community is not a real issue with anyone, but the people involved in spreading the hate. So, why is it often presumed to be an attack? Most Christians who consider them to be a threat to their children or society by indoctrinating them, tend to contradict themselves by implementing their own influence on kids with the very same form of indoctrination believers claim the gay community is using.
3. In regards to therapy for older kids who are within the range of hitting puberty, expressing feelings developed for the same sex, the type of counseling and therapy mentioned is not what many have been led to believe. The reason LGBT supporters have called for a banning on counseling for kids who were confused about homosexual issues is because the method of therapy used is not for the kids benefit or helping them understand their feelings for the same sex, instead these counselors have been using conversion therapy; a series of treatments that are aimed with an intent to change a persons sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual in order to basically instill them with notions that homosexuality is a mental sickness and an abomination. Methods in these type of practices are often harmful, causing more problems for the youth, leaving them to be in constant confliction with their feelings and how they are viewed by others in their environment.
4. Adoption: many people feel same sex couples should not adopt children, fearing they will also become gay from the absence of a mother/father relationship displayed in their household. The main supporters of this argument are both right wing Christians as well as far left black nationalist, but with one exception; black nationalist view homosexuality as an unnatural, western European sickness which has been adopted by blacks and is currently being forced upon the children, whereas right wing Christians consider homosexuality to be an abomination created by the devil. Despite their vastly differing views as to where it comes from, they both share the same view of what they perceive as a likely outcome. However, each view is merely a product of belief systems that hold a prejudice to anything opposite of what is the accepted norm, neither view has been validated or supported by any form of scientific research, nor do they have a rational, objective basis. In truth, their views are subjective in nature, with nothing tangible to present. Both groups often overlook evidence which has proved having a gay father or lesbian mother does not determine what sex the kid will be attracted to in the future. Another misconception surfacing from this centers on how we develop sexual attraction. Attraction of any kind is mostly based on personal preference to what a person has been exposed to or experienced that arouses a certain level of excitement for them, rather than outside influence of what others force up on you. Despite most of earths populace identifying their sexual orientation as straight, this does not mean homosexuality is an unnatural occurrence in our society, in fact; many of the same individuals who have proclaimed they are heterosexual, are in the closet because of what has been deemed socially acceptable by peers, family, and more. Homosexuality has existed for years and is also found in other animals.
Evidence#3: Gay Marriage
In recent years, Americans have began legalizing same sex marriage, making it possible for gay and lesbian couples to marry the love of their life as well as enjoy the same benefits offered to straight couples. Because of this groundbreaking decision, several anti-gay protestors have become more visible and aggressive in public settings. Most arguments opposing gay marriage generally focus on defiling the sanctity of marriage, making a mockery of a tradition which has long been regarded as a sacred union between a man and a woman, but marriage in modern times is a far cry from what it once was. Throughout the centuries, marriage has gone through multiple changes. With each change came a noticeable difference found in what the next generations' populace considered to be socially acceptable. Many of the same people who follow this claim also believe marriage is for raising kids, arguing their inability to procreate disqualifies them from being acknowledged as a newly wed couple. Supporters of this argument often overlook how such an assertion contradicts both it's origins as well as the fact there are many straight couples who either have no children or are not fertile to have any children. Other arguments center on cultural symbolism, undermining the institution of marriage, and the notion that gay couples form an unnatural union which cannot be marriage. Each of these arguments fail to prove the validity of their claims on a factual level versus a religious or personal belief. For instance; Christian nationalists consider a legalized same sex union to be a threat to their efforts in the fight for defining boundaries of American culture & law, further claiming it would represent the defeat of their religion if it were to be accepted. This means they have a fear of losing authority and influence over these matters, which begs the question; should religion have any authority over marriage? Based on today's society, religions involvement in marriage is not a necessity for those who wish to be wed, at best, it is merely included as a traditional preference.
With all the changes in our current societies' political ideologies, religious authority or influence is no longer considered to be the only voice able to speak on legal matters in relation to marriage.
Is there a homosexual agenda?
In terms of corrupting others or "turning them out", there is no plot centered on fulfilling such claims, however there is an agenda, but of a different nature. The only agenda you will see from them is nothing more than a group of people who are no different from you or me, fighting for acceptance in a world shunning them for being who they are. This way of thinking often stems from deep rooted homophobia, lack of historical knowledge, misinformation, and overall; prejudice to something outside of this society's flawed concept of what has been deemed masculine and feminine. Like they say; people fear what they do not understand, as a result; anything different from what is expected comes off as a threat to them. It doesn't matter how strong a person's aversion to change may be, with the coming of each new era, change is and always will be necessary for each generation to learn and grow.
I would like to give a big shoutout to a cool friend, miss Cocos Butter for helping me find the correct years for the Egyptian portion of my evidence. Thank you so much for your help!
No comments:
Post a Comment